[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Packaging sysfsutils: static library?

Hello everybody!

Today I read about the upcoming architecture for kernel device files
[1]. devfs is already marked obsolete (what a pity, I really like
it...) and will be replaced by an userspace daemon udev.

This daemon and also other userspace programs rely on libsysfs which
provides a consistent interface to the kernel device information file
system (called "sysfs"). It already works, sysfs itself is in the
kernel for quite a while now, and the package provides two executables
which make use of it. Thus it seems worth packaging. Adrian Bunk
happened to file an RFP [2] just today, so there is at least one
other person that likes playing with it :-)

Since this is stuff that will still change frequently and it is not
used by real applications yet, I think it is sensible just to ship a
static library and the two programs in a single package "sysfsutils"
now. When the interface stabilizes and the library comes to real use,
I would provide the full set of shared library, -dev and -runtime

Is it reasonable to provide just a static library? Policy 8.3 allows
it in principle, but since I'm not very experienced at this, I would
welcome any suggestions and your opinions.

Thanks and have a nice weekend!


[1] http://archive.linuxsymposium.org/ols2003/Proceedings/All-Reprints/Reprint-Kroah-Hartman-OLS2003.pdf
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/215257
Martin Pitt
home:  www.piware.de
eMail: martin@piware.de

Reply to: